Re: [foreman-dev] bringing pulp-2.10 into katello

On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 5:58 PM, Justin Sherrill wrote: > On 08/24/2016 05:48 PM, Tom McKay wrote: > > > > On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 5:36 PM, Chris Duryee wrote: > >> >> >> On 08/24/2016 05:33 PM, Tom McKay wrote: >> > Katello and foreman are nearing dev

Re: [foreman-dev] bringing pulp-2.10 into katello

On 08/24/2016 05:48 PM, Tom McKay wrote: On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 5:36 PM, Chris Duryee > wrote: On 08/24/2016 05:33 PM, Tom McKay wrote: > Katello and foreman are nearing dev freeze in early September but there are > a few

Re: [foreman-dev] bringing pulp-2.10 into katello

On 08/24/2016 05:33 PM, Tom McKay wrote: > Katello and foreman are nearing dev freeze in early September but there are > a few features centered around Atomic Host and Atomic Registry that will > need changes introduced in pulp-2.10. While I understand pulp-2.10 is > currently still in beta, I

Re: [foreman-dev] Using tmpfs significantly reduces testing time

> I would suggest even considering moving the entire /var/lib dir to tmpfs > instead of on disk so the other DBs will get a boost - assuming the > /var/lib dir is created anyways only for the worker's lifetime and > destroyed afterwards. That's perhaps too much. But fine tuning PostgreSQL and

Re: [foreman-dev] Using tmpfs significantly reduces testing time

Please file a PR so we can compare speedup on Jenkins and discuss details. LZ On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 02:35:21AM -0700, Shimon Shtein wrote: > > I have ext4 for my home and tmpfs for /tmp. > I haven't tried your solution (symlink), but if you say it's pretty much > the same as in-memory, I

Re: [foreman-dev] Hash rocket syntax

I was thinking about responding to the items in your email but I feel like I’ve put enough time into this discussion already. Just some general thoughts. I think you’re mischaracterizing my argument. I am not arguing that we enable all cops. In fact, in the dynflow case I tried to open a PR with

Re: [foreman-dev] Hash rocket syntax

On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 4:49 AM, Marek Hulán wrote: > Few more comments below > > > What do you mean by "Foreman dev"? > > You, me, everyone who contributed to Foreman. > So then your statement about not one foreman dev being a rubocop contributor is incorrect, right? > >

Re: [foreman-dev] Hash rocket syntax

On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 10:49 AM, Marek Hulán wrote: > Few more comments below > >> What do you mean by "Foreman dev"? > > You, me, everyone who contributed to Foreman. > >> I’ve contributed to both foreman and >> rubocop several times. Having worked on rubocop with all its

Re: [foreman-dev] Using tmpfs significantly reduces testing time

+1 to looking into implementing on Jenkins. I would suggest even considering moving the entire /var/lib dir to tmpfs instead of on disk so the other DBs will get a boost - assuming the /var/lib dir is created anyways only for the worker's lifetime and destroyed afterwards. If this even gives us a

Re: [foreman-dev] Using tmpfs significantly reduces testing time

I have ext4 for my home and tmpfs for /tmp. I haven't tried your solution (symlink), but if you say it's pretty much the same as in-memory, I will surely switch to it. On Wednesday, August 24, 2016 at 12:10:05 PM UTC+3, Lukas Zapletal wrote: > > > It would be nice to see the differences. > >

Re: [foreman-dev] Using tmpfs significantly reduces testing time

> It would be nice to see the differences. It's almost the same speedup as with symlink (the difference is loading the database three times perhaps): real13m32.018s user11m13.229s sys 0m12.004s What is your file system? That might do the difference. -- Later, Lukas #lzap

Re: [foreman-dev] Requesting 1-2 week branch warning

On 23/08/16 21:05, Eric D Helms wrote: > I'd like to request a 1-2 week branch warning for 1.13 (future releases > would be great too). The month warning is great for helping finalize > priorities. On top of that, I think having a 1 week warning with the > date would help developers work to wrap

Re: [foreman-dev] Hash rocket syntax

Few more comments below > What do you mean by "Foreman dev"? You, me, everyone who contributed to Foreman. > I’ve contributed to both foreman and > rubocop several times. Having worked on rubocop with all its cops enabled > hasn’t been a deterrent to me even though I don’t necessarily agree